THURSDAY, 19 AUGUST 2004

                                ____





                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

                                ____

The House met at 14:00.

The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

QUESTIONS AND REPLIES – see that book.

                         NOTICES OF MOTIONS

Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move:

That this House discuss the effective protection of whistle-blowers in the fight against corruption in the public sector.

Mr C M LOWE: Madam Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move:

That the House discuss the effectiveness of Sector Education and Training Authorities in improving the skills of both the employed and the unemployed in South Africa.

Ms C DUDLEY: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move:

That the House discuss the need to review the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act, considering the scientific evidence that has come to light recently.

                            FINANCE BILL

                           (Introduction)

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Deputy Speaker, hon members, the Finance Bill before the House proposes to give effect to the resolutions of the Standing Committee and Public Accounts. These resolutions contain recommendations and certain unauthorised expenditure that may be submitted to Parliament for authorisation.

It should be noted that these recommendations came about as a result of Scopa exercising oversight over public money by gathering and considering all relevant information and unauthorised expenditure. A great deal of dedication and diligence shown by members of the Public Accounts Committee, combined with an earnest will to find and consider the actual facts of each case, brought about the resolutions, as submitted to Parliament, which Parliament subsequently adopted. The amounts go back to the 1998 fiscal year and are around R50 million.

Madam Speaker, I hereby introduce the Finance Bill 2004. I thank you.[Applause.]

Bill referred to Portfolio Committee on Finance for consideration and report.

          CHOICE ON TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

There was no debate.

Declarations of vote:

Mr R COETZEE: Madam Deputy Speaker, it is simply wrong that the ANC opposed a debate on this Bill. It is a controversial piece of legislation that will have an impact on the lives of many South Africans. It is also a matter of intense public interest, and there should have been a proper debate.

The policy of the DA is to allow each of our members to determine his or her own position on matters of conscience, including abortion. We understand and respect the fact that men and women of good intention may disagree on certain controversial issues, either on grounds of religion or ethics. Consequently each of our members here today will exercise a free vote on this Bill.

I wish to emphasise that the way in which our members vote is not necessarily an indication of whether they are pro-choice or against abortion. Rather, our members have made up their minds whether or not they believe this particular amending Bill to be right or wrong – a good law or a bad law.

I must add that many members of our caucus, on both sides of the abortion debate, including some who support the objectives of the Bill, believe it makes for very bad law. Among those who oppose it there are two primary concerns: Firstly, allowing already overburdened and underqualified nurses to perform abortions will increase the risk to pregnant women. Secondly, doctors and nurses who oppose abortion will be put under still greater pressure to participate in abortion procedures against their will.

The truth is that the public health sector simply does not have the capacity to provide quality health care to the people of our country, and this Bill exposes that fact rather dramatically.

Finally, I wish to say that our members have considered this piece of legislation carefully. Each has arrived at a conclusion in good faith, motivated by her or his view of what is good and right. In the DA we respect each other’s opinions and we hope that a similar tolerance will be observed in this House and in our country. [Applause.]

Ms C DUDLEY: Madam Speaker, during deliberations on the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill, the ACDP proposed that the entire amending Bill be scrapped, and called for a review of the principal Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act.

At hearings held on 3 August, presenters were unanimous in their concern over the amending Bill, which aims at increasing access to abortion. The negative impact of the Bill on health workers and health services was a common concern, but the overriding issue was the increased risk to women’s emotional and physical wellbeing, and the blatant further violation of the unborn child’s right to life.

The committee, however, has simply ignored the input, and proceeded unabated on a mission to steamroll the Bill through Parliament. When the ACDP’s proposal to scrap the Bill was voted against on Wednesday, the ACDP proposed amendments aimed at minimising the negative effects of the Bill, but to no avail.

The ACDP also challenged the statement in the Bill that financial implications for the state are not expected to be major. It is our view that increased access to abortion, which is the point of the Bill, will result in a significant rise in costs. This will be detrimental to the health budget, and will compromise already strained health services.

The ACDP was the only party to vote against the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill in the committee, and requested that the Bill be debated. This was denied, motivating students, mostly from the University of Cape Town, to protest at the gates of Parliament, chanting: “Why no debate?” and holding placards saying: “Are you afraid of the truth? – Abortion kills babies.” Is government afraid that members of Parliament will think before they vote if debate is allowed?

The new law will increase the number of hospitals performing abortions. At the same time the law will not only allow nurses to kill unborn babies, but will put them under severe pressure to do so. MPs and officials were adamant that a clause protecting the right of health workers to participate on grounds of conscience or belief would undermine the Choice On Termination Of Pregnancy Act, and was therefore unacceptable.

The main argument in 1996 was that the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act would reduce the number of women being injured by illegal abortions. Legal abortion appears to have failed, even in this, and injury to women may, in fact, have even increased. Independent poles show the 1996 abortion law to be South Africa’s most unpopular law. Nine out of ten South Africans believe abortion is morally wrong and the vast majority of nurses and doctors oppose it. This Bill makes it worse.

The ACDP will vote against this Bill and implores MPs to take a stand and do the same. Do not let the blood of more innocent babies be on your hands. The 1996 abortion law has been shown to have failed in its implementation. There is massive conscientious objection in our hospitals; and there is a large-scale abuse of the rights of conscientious objectors. It is being ignored.

Abortionists are regularly breaking the law without prosecution. Women are not being counselled as to the health risks of abortion and the development of the baby, as promoted by the law. [Time expired.] I thank you.

Mr B E PULE: Madam Deputy Speaker, the UCDP decries the fact that this debate takes place in August - the month dedicated to women. We, in the UCDP, take note of the euphemism used in referring to the killing of a young baby as termination of pregnancy. To us pregnancy can be terminated by the natural birth of a child, or miscarriage, and not by any humanly induced method.

The use of the word fetus in reference thereto, as some stuff that is inhuman, is incorrect, as fetus is a Latin word for young one, and therefore, getting rid of such a young one is for us murder and we are averse to that.

We know that strangers to the truth keep informing the public that abortion does not cause loss of fertility, but it does, along with many other medical problems about which women are never warned. Empirical research has proved that termination of pregnancy can be linked to infertility, tubal pregnancy, cervical damage, severe depression, breast cancer, suicide and so forth.

The UCDP will vote against the Bill. [Applause.]

Dr C P MULDER: Hon Deputy Speaker, I would like to address myself to the hon Minister of Health directly. The fact of the matter is that this Bill will make it easier for abortions to be performed in this country. That is a fact. This will be the case for two reasons.

Firstly, registered nurses will now be allowed to do exactly what doctors were supposed to do. Secondly, it won’t be necessary for the national Minister to indicate such facilities; it will now be up to the provincial Minister to do so in order to speed up this process.

We are not talking about theory. We are talking about practice. What is happening at this very moment in state institutions? I can give you an example: Babies weighing less than a thousand grams at birth are not given specific attention or care in intensive care units. They are basically allowed to die. That is what is happening.

What’s happening in practice is the following: Women come to these state institutions for abortions after the period expired in terms of which they are allowed to have such an abortion has expired. Once they come there, they are given medicine to get the process going.

I can give you an example of a child being born, weighing 850 grams. That child was not dead. It was alive. What happened then? The nursing staff did not give any attention to that child, because it was supposed to be an abortion, and it was supposed to die. That child lived for a further 48 hours. That is what happens in state institutions in this country. For 48 hours that child lived - without any attention, no food, nothing - before it died. It was allowed to die.

My problem is this, Madam Minister: Now you are allowing nurses to perform abortions. How many of them will know that they are not supposed to do an abortion when women come there after the period that is allowed for abortions has expired?

An HON MEMBER: Did you report it?

Dr C P MULDER: Report it? Why is it necessary? Why is the department not doing anything about it? [Interjections.] Your department is allowing these things to happen. We are not talking about this “wonderful choice”. We are talking about the killing of human beings.

I want to ask the Minister, the women and especially the mothers in this House: Which one of your children would you have preferred to abort? [Interjections.] Are there any of your children that you would have preferred to abort? No, of course not, because we are talking about human beings.

The fact of the matter is, the FF Plus will vote against this Bill. With these amendments you are going to allow more children to be killed. Young babies weighing less than a thousand grams are going to be born, and they will be left, in terms of your government’s policy, to die in our hospitals. We cannot allow that.

The Rules of this House make provision, in terms of Rule 81(2), that a written statement can be handed in under the signature of a member to be published in the Minutes of Proceedings. I am doing that to put our point of view on record. We will be voting against this very bad Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]

Ms F BATYI: Hon Deputy Speaker and members in the House, at the outset, it is important to make the point that we are not voting today on whether we agree or disagree on the termination of pregnancy. That debate has already taken place and the termination of pregnancy has been enacted into law through the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act. What we are debating today is whether we agree on the amendments to this Bill or not.

The ID recognises that the issue of termination of pregnancy is a particularly divisive one in South Africa. This was evident throughout the public hearings, where many organisations put forward strong positions. As the ID, we believe that if termination of pregnancy is to occur in South Africa, the health and wellbeing of the women concerned have to be protected.

It is for this reason that the ID would have liked to see the following provisions included in the current Bill: We believe that health staff who morally object to such procedure should have a right to conscientiously object. The ID also believes that mandatory counselling should be provided to applicants before an abortion procedure so that women are fully informed about the important choice, and that they are aware of the possible side- effects on their physical, mental and psychological health.

The ID also believes that strict monitoring of repeat abortions, especially in the case of teenage pregnancies, needs to occur. The ID would also have liked to see included in this Bill a provision that provincial health MECs should produce quarterly bulletins that state how many new facilities were approved and the number of abortions done during that quarter.

The ID also agrees with the Planned Parenthood Association of SA that the Department of Health must establish a code of good practice for health workers and constantly provide them with information and upskilling. This is going to be particularly important if, as stated in this Bill, nurses will now be allowed to perform terminations of pregnancy. I thank you.

Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act was promulgated to stop illegal backstreet abortions and money-making, to stop the rate of orphans and unwanted pregnancies rising, to curtail poverty and to allow females the freedom of choice. All women have the freedom to have babies, to create families; and they have the freedom not to have families. [Applause.]

The MF will only support this Bill if the proper legal provisions that are in the Bill are followed, safety precautions are taken and all females who want to terminate pregnancies are advised properly. Thereafter they should use their own initiatives and make their choice. Thank you. [Applause.]

Ms N C NKABINDE: Deputy Speaker and hon members, the UDM supports this amending Bill. As a slight comment, I wish to remind those who wish to turn today’s debate into a policy debate that, firstly, the Bill never sought to amend the overall policy. It would have been far more constructive if they had raised their concerns in a separate debate. Surely, if this policy was of such importance to them, they could have petitioned the Speaker and the relevant committee to debate the overall policy?

Secondly, this policy has its foundation in the Constitution, and has been confirmed by the Constitutional Court. Women have a right to make this decision. That is why the Act has the word “choice” in it. [Applause.]

It is fine to object on moral, religious or other grounds. What concerns me is that often the objectors carry on as if women are being forced to make use of this procedure. This is false. I am certain that many women share the convictions of the objectors, and hence do not make use of the rights afforded by this Act, but there are many women who do not share the objectors’ convictions. Are we expected to remove their choice? Are the very people who protest this policy forcing people to do something against their will? Are they in fact the people who want to force people in one direction when they would rather choose another?

I thank you. [Applause.]

Dr R RABINOWITZ: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, I apologise for being late. The order of the speakers’ list was changed. The IFP is a party representing people of many races and religious persuasions. Our public representatives include people who practise Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism and African religions; some are agnostic and a few even consider themselves atheists. We respect one another’s diversity, but as a party we are united by our belief in the sanctity of life.

Fertilisation, conception and birth all are part of the miracle of life, and deserves sensitive handling by lawmakers. Rights are essential if coupled with responsibility, respect and family or community values; alone they breed selfishness and entitlement. As lawmakers we believe that we should be role models, and particularly with the current Aids crisis, we should do all in our power to discourage sexual intercourse, promote abstinence and celibacy and take pregnancy seriously.

Abortion on demand, given at any time, to anyone, including minors, by any nurse, turns abortion into a form of contraception, and embryos into mere clumps of tissue.

The IFP condones abortion only under limited circumstances, most particularly if there is danger to the life of the fetus or the mother, or following rape or incest, and if practised by a doctor or trained midwife, preferably with the consent of a parent or a spouse, and definitely after counselling and attempts to foster alternative choices.

We do support the devolution of some of the authority and the tightening-up of places where abortion should be given in terms of their quality, but we oppose the amendments. [Applause.]

Mr S J NJIKELANA: Madam Deputy Speaker, the ANC is honoured to speak in advocacy of the amendment to the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act, one of the most progressive and enabling pieces of legislation in Africa, for the benefit of women’s health and rights.

The key focus of this amending Bill is the decentralisation of authority of the designation of facilities for the termination of pregnancy, which will include provincial MECs for health, as well as allowing private and public facilities that meet the requisite criteria to perform termination of pregnancies.

Furthermore, it will ensure an increase in the number of potential service providers who will undergo appropriate and specialised training. The main advantage of this amendment is the improvement of the geographical spread and capacity of the functional facilities, and the fact that it allows local health services to respond to local needs. In line with our national development priorities, the Bill aims to ensure such services are not only accessible in urban areas, but also in the rural areas.

Furthermore, raising the levels of service provision enables HIV-positive women, who choose to terminate their pregnancies, to do so in supportive environments. What we have here in this Bill is one of the expected technical refinements of the principal Act.

The ANC knows that the substantial majority of submissions during the public hearings clearly criticised the principal Act. However, the purpose and focus of the amendment is not the overall redo of the principal Act. The debate on the principal Act has long taken place and was closed. I, therefore, appeal to those who have fundamental differences with the principal Act to use appropriate mechanisms and avenues to present and express their views against the Act, but not here.

The process of deliberating on and finalising of this Bill must not be abused as a platform for cheap political gains by those who have ulterior motives. The ANC has and will cherish and promote public debate on any sensitive issue, but will never support the abuse thereof.

It is actually strange that there is only one member of the ACDP present, whilst it is the very party that is calling for a division. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Question put: That the Bill be read a second time.

Division demanded.

 The House divided:




 AYES-218: Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Anthony, T G; Arendse, J D; Asiya, S
 E; Bapela, K O; Batyi, F; Benjamin, J; Bhamjee, Y S; Bhengu, F; Bhengu,
 P; Bhoola, R B; Bici, J; Bloem, D V; Blose, H M; Bogopane-Zulu, H I;
 Burgess, C V; Cachalia, I M; Carrim, Y I; Chalmers, J; Chauke, H P;
 Chikunga, L S; Chohan-Khota, F I; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; Dambuza, B
 N; Davies, R H; De Lange, J H; De Lille, P; Diale, L N; Dikgacwi, M M;
 Dipico, E M; Dlali, D M; Dodovu, T S; Doidge, G Q M; Du Toit, D C;
 Fihla, N B; Frolick, C T; Fubbs , J L; Gabela, L S; Gcwabaza, N E;
 Gerber, P A; Gillwald, C E; Gogotya, N J; Gololo, C L; Gomomo, P J;
 Goniwe, M T; Greyling, C H F; Gumede, D M; Gumede, M M; Gxowa, N B;
 Hajaig, F; Hanekom, D A; Harding, A; Hendricks, L B; Hendrickse, P;
 Holomisa, B H; Holomisa, S P; Huang, S; Jacobus, L; Jeffery, J H;
 Joemat, R R; Johnson, C B; Jordan, Z P; Kalako, M U; Kannemeyer, B W;
 Kasienyane, O R; Kati, Z J; Kekana, C D; Kholwane, S E; Khumalo, K K;
 Khumalo, K M; Khunou, N P; Komphela, B M; Kondlo, N C; Koornhof, G W;
 Kota, Z A; Kotwal, Z; Landers, L T; Lishivha, T E; Louw, S K; Ludwabe,
 C I; Maake, J J; Mabe, L L; Mabena, D C; Mabuyakhulu, D V; Madikiza, G
 T; Madlala-Routledge, N C; Maduma , L D; Madumise, M M; Magau, K R;
 Magazi, M N; Mahlawe, N M; Mahote, S; Maja, S J; Makasi, X C; Maloyi, P
 D N; Maluleka, H P; Manana, M N S; Manie, M S; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N;
 Martins, B A D; Mashigo, R J; Mashile, B L; Masutha, T M; Mathebe, P M;
 Mathibela, N F; Matlala, M H; Matsepe-Casaburri, I F; Maunye, M M;
 Mayatula, S M; Maziya, A M; Mbombo, N D; Mdaka, N M; Mdladlana, M M S;
 Mentor, M P; Meruti, M V; Mgabadeli, H C; Mkhize, Z S; Mnandi, P N;
 Mngomezulu, G P; Moatshe, M S; Modisenyane, L J; Mofokeng, T R; Mogale,
 O M; Mogase, I D; Mokoena, A D; Molefe, C T; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy,
 K; Morobi, D M; Morutoa, M R; Morwamoche, K W; Mosala, B G; Moss, L N;
 Moss, M I; Motubatse-Hounkpatin, S D; Mpaka, H M; Mshudulu, S A;
 Mthembu, B; Mtshali, E; Mufamadi, F S; Mzondeki, M J G; Ndzanga, R A;
 Nene, N M; Newhoudt-Druchen, W S; Ngaleka, E; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngcobo,
 B T; Ngele, N J; Ngwenya, M L; Nhleko, N P; Nhlengethwa, D G;
 Njikelana, S J; Njobe, M A A; Nkabinde, N C; Nkuna, C; Nogumla, R Z;
 Nqakula, C; Ntuli, M M; Ntuli, S B; Nxumalo, M D; Olifant, D A A;
 Oliphant, G G; Phala, M J; Phungula, J P; Pieterse, R D; Radebe, B A;
 Radebe, J T; Rajbally, S; Ramakaba-Lesiea, M M; Ramgobin, M; Ramodibe,
 D M; Rasmeni, S M; Reid, L R R; Saloojee, E; Schneemann, G D; Schoeman,
 E A; Sefularo, M; Sekgobela, P S; September , C C; Shabangu, S;
 Sibande, M P; Sibanyoni, J B; Siboza, S; Sigcau, S N; Sigcau, Sylvia N;
 Sikakane, M R; Sithole, D J; Skhosana, W M; Smith , V G; Solo, B M;
 Solomon, G; Sonjica, B P; Sonto, M R; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M;
 Stephens, M; Stofile, M A; Surty, M E; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tolo, L
 J; Tsenoli, S L; Tshabalala-Msimang, M E; Tshivhase, T J; Tshwete, P;
 Turok, B; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van Wyk, Annelizé; Vundisa, S S; Wang,
 Y; Xingwana, L M; Xolo, E T; Yengeni, L L; Zita, L; Zulu, B Z; Zuma, J
 G.


 NOES-52: Bekker, H J; Bhengu, M J; Biyela, B P; Blanché, J P I;
 Boinamo, G G; Botha, C-S; Camerer, S M; Chang, E S; Davidson, I O;
 Delport, J T; Ditshetelo, P H K; Doman, W P; Dudley, C; Ellis, M J;
 Farrow, S B; Haasbroek, S F; Jankielsohn, R; Joubert, L K; King, R J;
 Kohler-Barnard, D; Labuschagne, L B; Mars, I; Masango , S J; Mdlalose,
 M M; Minnie, K J; Mnyandu, B J; Mulder, C P; Nel, A H; Ngema, M V;
 Opperman, S E; Pule, B E; Rabinowitz, R; Roopnarain, U; Schmidt, H C;
 Seaton, S A; Selfe, J; Sibuyana, M W; Simmons, S; Smuts, M; Spies, W D;
 Steyn, A C; Swart, M; Swathe, M M; Taljaard, R; Van der Walt, D; Van
 Niekerk, A I; Vezi, T E; Waters, M; Weber, H; Woods, G G; Zille, H;
 Zulu, N E.


 ABSTAIN-15: Coetzee, R; Gibson, D H M; Godi, N T; Henderson, R K;
 Kalyan, S V; Leon, A J; Lowe, C M; Mohamed, I J; Morgan, G R;
 Mpontshane, A M; Pheko, S E M; Rabie, P J; Skosana, M B; Vadi, I; Van
 Dyk, S M.


 Question agreed to.


 Bill accordingly read a second time.




 DENTAL TECHNICIANS AMENDMENT BILL



                       (Second Reading debate)

There was no debate.

Bill read a second time.

IMMIGRATION AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Deputy Speaker, Deputy President and hon members, in his state of the nation address at the opening of the third democratic Parliament, the President of South Africa committed government to finalising the immigration regulations within three months.

However, when we started this process, it soon became clear that it was not going to be possible to address the problems identified in the draft regulations without effecting certain changes to the principal Act. At this stage the Department of Home Affairs had been working with the principal Act and interim regulations for just over a year, and shared the view of the State Law Adviser that urgent amendments were necessary to correct fundamental flaws in the principal Act.

A sound immigration policy is vital to the country for a number of reasons. Such policy should facilitate economic development, attract foreign skills and investment, and reflect our commitment to human rights and the security of those who live within our borders, both citizens and residents. Our immigration policy should be consistent with our foreign policy objectives, particularly with regard to SADC and the continent. It should also be consistent with our commitment not to discriminate on the basis of gender.

In the medium term, government intends developing and refining its immigration policies. This amending Bill and the regulations that will follow represent a short-term intervention. Nevertheless, we have consulted extensively in the short period afforded to us. The amending Bill contains a number of drafting and technical amendments. Here I will outline some of the more noteworthy and progressive changes that will make the principal Act more user-friendly and equitable.

The preamble has been amended to properly reflect the purpose of the Act and to emphasise the need for the country to attract scarce skills and the role of the government in the development and growth of the region and continent.

A number of definitions have been clarified, for example the definition of spouse will be brought in line with a Constitutional Court judgment on the issue, and will now include permanent heterosexual and homosexual relationships as prescribed. The definition of marriage and customary marriages will be brought in line with the existing legislation. Instead of talking about the powers of the department in terms of the replacement section, the Minister retains executive powers. The power to take administrative decisions is vested in the Director-General, DG.

The principal Act provided for the establishment and composition of the Immigration Advisory Board. The relevant sections will be amended to make provision for the inclusion of the representatives of the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development on the board, as well as to change the name of the Department of Finance to the National Treasury.

This amendment requires that representation be at the Deputy Director- General level, which will ensure accountability at a sufficiently senior level. The amendment provides that the Minister is no longer required to solicit public nominations for the civil society representatives on the board, but rather allows for the appointment of one representative of organised labour and one of organised business. The Minister is also able to appoint up to five members of the board on the basis of relevant expertise. The operations of the board will be described by the regulations.

Amendments to the principal Act reflect the advisory nature of the board and emphasise the role of the board in facilitating the interdepartmental co-operation on immigration matters. Likewise, the section that mandated the DG to establish a liasing committee of departments involved in border control will be repealed, as it is felt that existing forums already serve that purpose. A new section dealing comprehensively with regulations will remove the cumbersome requirements concerning public comments, which required the Minister to respond to each comment in footnotes to the regulations. However, regulations will be published for public comment.

Amendments have been made to section 8 of the Immigration Act to streamline the process of internal appeals and reviews of administrative decisions taken by officials in the department, and to bring it in line with the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act. In order to bring the principal Act in line with other legislation, powers or functions are attributed to the DG and not the department, as is currently the case with the principal Act.

As a legal mandate to levy fees, such as the training fund under the principal Act that falls under the Department of Labour, this provision will be deleted. The requirement for a chartered accountant’s certificate has been removed from the Act. Foreigners or employers will now have to prove certain matters to the satisfaction of the DG, which may include the submission of a chartered accountant’s certificate. These will be specified in the regulations. This reflects our conviction that the implementation of immigration laws and policy should not be privatised, but should always fall under the mantle of government.

While we recognise the expertise of chartered accountants in assessing complex financial matters, we believe it is not appropriate, for example, to hand them the responsibility of evaluating labour standards and agreements. While immigration law is a specialised field which requires specialised expertise, it is not appropriate to legislate such courts, and the reference to immigration courts will be removed from the principal Act.

The principal Act prohibited the recording of entry into and departure from the Republic of citizens. In response to concerns of Statistics South Africa, the Reserve Bank and the SAPS, amongst others, an amendment will provide for such recording. While the principal Act provides for an asylum permit, a new clause introduces an asylum transit permit that will be valid for 14 days. This will enable an asylum seeker to report in person to a refuge reception office within that period and apply for an asylum seeker’s permit in terms of the Refugees Act. This will clearly distinguish asylum transit permits from asylum seekers’ permits. If the transit permit expires before the holder has reported to a refugee reception office, the holder becomes an illegal foreigner and will be dealt with as such in terms of the principal Act. This amendment is designed to protect bona fide asylum seekers, while at the same time discouraging abuse of this process.

Amendments to the principal Act will require a foreigner who is married to a South African citizen or permanent resident to wait for a period of five years before being able to apply for permanent residence. On the basis of the marriage, foreign spouses will be entitled to a temporary residents permit, which will allow them to work and study.

A further amendment provides that anyone found in possession of a fraudulent residents permit, passport or identity document is regarded as a prohibited person and, therefore, does not qualify for a temporary or permanent residents permit, a visa or admission into the Republic. The amendment to the effect that police officers or immigration officers should interview any person whose status is in doubt before taking such person into custody, will ensure that the right of citizens and non-citizens alike will be respected and protected.

I would like to close by thanking all the officials in the department, particularly the Directors-General and the state law advisers, who worked very hard on these amendments and are poised to ensure that regulations are published without delay. I would like to thank my colleagues in the Cabinet and members of their departments for their helpful comments and insights given at short notice. I’m sure you will agree that these amendments will improve and streamline the operation of immigration management and control, as well as provide a basis for transparent and workable regulations, as promised by the President.

Hayi ke basebenzi ndiyathemba into yokokuba nixolile ke ngoku, ngale immigration sinivile izikhalo zenu ngayo. Yeyenu le policy esipasise apha namhlanje. Siyabulela. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of Xhosa paragraph follows.)

[I think, workers, you are now pleased by this Immigration Amendment Bill. Your grievances about it have been heard. This policy that has been passed here today is yours. Thank you. [Applause]]

Mr H P CHAUKE: Madam Deputy Speaker … [Interjections.]

You see, my only problem is, because we have taken a decision as a portfolio committee to close the porn shop next to Parliament about a week ago, the attack that I’m receiving from my left-hand side is really unprecedented. I understand their needs, but it’s unfortunate we had to do that because we have laws that govern this kind of business in the country.

Without any waste of time, I think the Minister has managed to cover most of the areas that we’ve been dealing with. The problem comes from the kind of Immigration Act that we have today. We are amending the Bill as it stands before us today to allow the Minister to be able to come out with regulations. If we recall, two years ago when the Act was passed, there was no policy. It was informed by the White Paper inputs that were taking place, but we did not have a clear policy that guided that process. That is why we are having these kinds of problems today.

Most opposition party members who participated in the portfolio committee deliberations understand the challenges that we are facing. I think all the parties in the portfolio committee have agreed that there is a need for reviewing the whole Act. The Minister did promise in her input during the public participation session that there would be a review of the entire Act.

Now, the area that I want to focus on is the public hearings, when Cosatu, together with Nedlac, was making an input. One of the issues they raised was the problem of workers, especially mineworkers. When they are dismissed unfairly by their bosses, the kind of permit that they have is terminated automatically and they must pack their bags and go back to their countries of origin.

The very positive amendment that we have tried to insert in the Act allows mineworkers to stay for as long as there is litigation that is taking place between the particular worker and the management. They will stay for a period of about six months. If the matter still continues, it would be extended by the Director-General of Home Affairs. [Applause.]

One of the areas that the Bill has attempted to address is the scourge of illegal marriages that are taking place in the country. In the Act, we have inserted a clause that deals with permanent residence. We have increased the term, and now say that any foreigner who marries a South African will only qualify for permanent residence after a period of five years. I think that’s our way, as a portfolio committee, of contributing to women’s issues in this month of August. By that we have ensured that not only women, but also men don’t find themselves in a situation where they are married to these illegal people without knowing it. So, within the Act we have embodied the fact that such people would have to be in a good marriage for a period of five years.

I want to thank the Director-General for the leadership that he has given when we were dealing with this amendment. Members will recall that when we were dealing with this matter two years ago, it was characterised by many problems and much infighting, especially in the absence of the policy I’ve made mention of. However, the Director-General and the Minister have given clear leadership. They have showed us leadership, first of all, in terms of how we can handle this process.

Secondly, they have taken us through each and every single amendment that we have been engaged in and all the clauses that we have amended. They have been with us, giving us all the support we needed. Even the members of the public who came during the public hearings, all agreed with us that there was no policy in place. That is why we have the kind of Immigration Act that we have today. All of them agreed that they wanted to contribute and help their government to come up with a clear policy on immigration.

To the Director-General and his team, together with the state law advisers and those who helped draft this amendment, you still have challenges lying ahead. I don’t have many words today, because we still have much work to do in making sure that we have a clear policy.

In his state of the nation address, the President gave the Minister three months to finalise the immigration regulations. There was no way in which the Minister could finalise this or come up with regulations with the kind of Act that we have. That is why we are introducing this amendment.

Minister, the task is on your shoulders now to make sure that you come up with regulations before the end of August. Obviously, the concern that was raised was that the public would not be given an opportunity to participate during the regulation meeting, but I want to assure everybody that the manner in which we have crafted the regulation-making process will allow each and everybody to make an input. It will also allow government and Parliament to publish in the Government Gazette the kind of regulations that we are going to make, so the public will still be given an opportunity to make their input.

The problem, Minister, has been that when we drafted the Bill, we were quite worried that some of the issues that we did not want to be reflected in the Act would be sneaked in through the regulations, and we were right. I’ll mention one example, concerning the Taiwan issue. It was said that that would depend on government-to-government relations, but now, because of the powers that the department has, they decided to make the regulation to put Taiwan in.

Some of the things that we do not want in the regulations, like the business levy that an individual with a work permit has to pay when he enters the country, are not the responsibility of Home Affairs. It is the responsibility of the Labour department to regulate around that area.

On the issue of the immigration courts, we have courts in this country and there is no way we are going to make immigration courts separate from these. We have therefore repealed that particular section.

On that note, Minister, I’m not going to waste much time. My colleagues will cover some of the areas that we have to deal with. I think we have done well on the issue of workers. Cosatu’s contribution is recognised and we have taken into account all the issues that it has raised. All the issues – for example Nedlac and business issues – were sort of incorporated into the amendment. We are, obviously, still going to have more debates and amend the Act. The sooner that happens, the sooner we’ll finalise the immigration policy.

On that note, I wish to thank the DG and his team very much. We would also like to thank the Department of Home Affairs and all the departments that participated in this process, making sure that we are able to amend. It was just a technical amendment, but we have achieved a great deal, especially on the issues of workers. Those workers will now be able to stay in the country and fight whatever injustices they are experiencing.

On that note, Minister, I wish to thank you very much for the leadership you’ve given. However, many challenges still lie ahead. We definitely have to come up with a clear policy on immigration, and I believe that with the leadership that you are giving, we’ll be able to do that.

The other issue that I want to finish with, Minister, is the question of the reviewing of the Home Affairs policy. All the 13 Home Affairs laws must be reviewed. There is no way that we can afford a situation where we cannot do that. For example, on the point I started with earlier, regarding the porn shop outside Parliament, that issue is regulated, but people tend to do things on their own as if there are no laws that govern this kind of thing in this country. It means that we must review that law.

We are going to call upon the Deputy Minister, as part of his responsibility, to tell us where the loopholes are. We have to close the gap. The DA can cry foul, jump up and scream, but we are going to change those things, because we cannot afford to have a situation where our country is turned into a banana republic, with porn shops everywhere you go – even right outside Parliament. We cannot afford that. [Interjections.]

I know you are angry, but we are going to do that. We are going to amend that Act to make sure that we have proper regulations in place. We are going to close down some of these shops that are located within the residential areas, Minister. We are going to close them down. We are going to close all the porn shops that are located next to our schools and churches.

On that note, Minister, I thank you very much. I also want to thank all the members of Parliament. [Applause.]

An HON MEMBER: Tell us about the DA-IFP marriage!

Mrs S V KALYAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, the amendments proposed to the current Immigration Act are a short-term quick fix aimed mainly at enabling the implementation of the Act, and is in keeping with the presidential deadline set in the state of the nation address in April of this year. The Minister has promised a more comprehensive review of South Africa’s immigration policy, and the DA welcomes this.

Despite many public submissions and an agreement with Nedlac to retain the civil society component on the Immigration Advisory Board, it would appear that the Minister reneged on the agreement. The result is that the role of civil society on the board has been diminished and there is a huge imbalance, obviously favouring government representation.

Also, the Minister can appoint whomever she likes and the result is that she could find herself surrounded by a band of yes-men. If that happens, the main function of the advisory board would be defeated. It is the DA’s considered opinion that civil society plays a vital role in keeping the checks and balances. There has not been sufficient motivation for diminishing the role of civil society, and the DA would like to urge the Minister to revisit this aspect in the interest of transparency.

While I’m not advocating more departmental representation, I do find the omission of a representative from the Department of Health curious. Given the recent outbreak of the SARS virus and the threat that HIV/Aids poses to South Africa, one would have expected a more serious approach to disease control, and who is better qualified to deal with this than the Department of Health?

The proposed amendments in respect of transit and asylum-transit permits are welcomed, as are the stricter suggested conditions for the application of permanent residence by foreigners on the grounds of marriage to South African citizens. Too many innocent South African women have fallen prey to opportunistic foreigners who offer so-called employment prospects, only to find themselves married without their permission and, of course, still jobless.

Members of the portfolio committee are often presented with stories of women whose IDs have been stolen and, on application for new IDs, they find themselves married. However, there are also women who enter into business- type marriages to enable their foreign partners to gain permanent residence in South Africa. The DA calls on all members of this House to encourage young female constituents to check their marital status and to support the Department of Home Affairs in its national “know your marital status” campaign.

In keeping with international trends, the proposed amendment to record both the entry and exit of South African citizens will go a long way to enhance our internal security, more especially in view of recent allegations regarding a South African connection in international terrorist activities.

The Department of Home Affairs is greatly underresourced, both in terms of human and nonhuman resources. While the department itself has acknowledged this and explained its turnaround strategy in great detail, the DA is still concerned that the lack of capacity may hinder the honourable intention of the amendment.

However, we can see the larger picture and wholeheartedly support one of the main objects of the amendment, which is to attract scarce skills. This will go a long way to address the current skills shortage, encourage transference to South African citizens and contribute to the economy of South Africa. The DA supports the amending Bill. [Applause.]

Mrs I MARS: Madam Deputy Chairman and hon Minister, last Tuesday’s editorial in Business Day aptly captured the essence of this Bill. It pointed out how the existing legislation had opened up our country to skilled and necessary immigration by allowing employers to determine which foreigners are needed, whereas the amendment we are now discussing will close down our country to much-needed migration.

In the words of that editorial, the existing system is self-regulating, while the present amendment introduces government discretion on the matter. Effectively, the present amendment will dismantle the entire reform of migration control, bringing back the original Act in terms of which it was the government that would decide on an ad hoc and individual basis who would be allowed to come into the country permanently or temporarily, as no objective and predictable criteria were then in place.

The present system relied on objective and predictable criteria, the application of which could easily be performed by employers and chartered accountants. The devolution of certain aspects of the application to such private entities enabled the Immigration Act, as it now stands, to raise the level of scrutiny and the complexity of requirements. However, this amending Bill eliminates the qualified input of private entities, forcing the department to perform a more complex assessment for which it is not qualified.

One example, amongst many, which will clarify the nature of this piece of legislation, is the following: The Immigration Act uses the criteria of book value to determine the contribution which enables an investor to receive a business permit. Any accountant would know how to determine book value, which includes both tangible and intangible assets. In terms of this Bill, this determination will now need to be made by the department, in which one could hardly identify anyone who would routinely perform or review book-value evaluations.

This example could be multiplied in respect of other permits. The Bill sets the clock back to the time when a US trade representative identified our obsolete old system of migration control as one of the major impairments to doing business in South Africa. In certain respects the new Bill will eliminate the legal basis on which the present system confirmed the long- standing tradition which, even under the Aliens Control Act, had regionalised the administration and issuance of permits.

Under this Bill permits will only be issued in a centralised manner, which will increase inefficiency and delays. Work permits will only be issued on the basis of labour certification, which the department is not equipped to review, and would need to defer to the Department of Labour, as it did five years ago.

However, the Department of Labour is not equipped or qualified for this task, as it does not have the underlying information, and should not be encouraged to pursue a long-discredited plan of developing a database of all existing and necessary skills.

The administration of work permits will be discretionary, if not arbitrary and enormously lengthy, both in terms of the applicant preparing the required documentation and the department processing it. The fact is that we have no idea how this will pan out, because it will all depend on the regulation.

The necessity of the Bill was motivated by the need to bring the Act into compliance with the regulation, which should not be the case, as legally one brings regulations in compliance with the Act, and not vice versa. However, it is untrue that this amendment will require a complete rewriting of the regulations.

The nature of this Bill presents a much broader threat to the current state. It was formulated, approved and finalised by Cabinet in less than three months, with the purpose of wiping out reform which took 10 years to complete and involved Green and White Papers, two international conferences … [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon member, your time has expired.

Mrs I MARS: Thank you. The IFP will abstain.

Mrs M M MAUNYE: Ke a leboha modula setulo, Letona la rona mme Mapisa- Ngcakula, matona ohle a leng ka hare ho Ntlo ena, ditho tsa Palamente, basebetsi le baeti ba rona ba leng teng kwano. Re lebohela boteng ba lona kwano kajeno. Modula setulo ntumelle hore ke hopole bo-mme ba rona ba ileng ba re hodisa mona ntweng ya ditokelo tsa rona re le bo-mme ba Afrika Borwa.

Re leboha bo-mme bohle ba ileng ba e hlanaka nakong tse thata tsa kgatello. Ho ne ho le bohloko mme, melao e thatafetse bakeng sa motho e motsho. Ka lehlakoreng la bo-mme e ne e le kgatello ena e utlwisang bohloko, ka ha ba ne ba sena ditokelo hohang jwalo ka ho reka naha kapa hona ho reka ntlo, esitana le hona ho ba le bukana ya banka, ho ingodisetsa dithuto tsa yunivesithi kapa tsona tsa teknikhono. Tsena tsohle ene e le toro ho ngwana wa morwetsana.

Kajeno ka lebaka la bo-mme ba rona ba kang bo-mme Rita, bo-mme Bertha le bo- mme Ivy, re kgona hore kgweding ena ya Phato re hopole bo-mme ha re qeta dilemo tse leshome tsa demokerasi, re keteka tokoloho ya demokerasi, re keteka hobane bo-mme ba ile ba itshwasolla diketaneng tsa kgatello. Kajeno ho monate pusong ena ya batho. Re amohela batho bohle ba tswang dinaheng tse ding, ho sa natswe hore na ba tswa kae.

Hoo eleng hwa bohlokwa ke hore ho be le molao wa naha o amohelang batsamai. Mang kapa mang ya etelang naha ena o lokela ho hlompha melao ya naha ena, le ho latela tsela eo ya ho etela mona, e leng ka bohahlaudi kapa ho tsetela le ha e le hona ho sebetsa, ho hlokehang ke hore o latele tsela e tshwanetseng, e batlehang ha o batla ho tla sebetsa kapa o le mohahlaudi naheng ena. Re tshehetsa letona ntlheng ya hore baahi ba Afrika Borwa ba ye dikantorong tsa lefapha la tsa lehae ho nnetefatsa hore re fela re nyalane le balekane ba rona, esere motho wa iphumana o nyaditswe motho kapa batho ba sa tsejweng.

Re hatella haholo ho batjha ba Afrika Borwa, mmoho le ba ho batho ba sa kang ba itlama ka manyalo, hore ho bohlokwa hore le hlokomedise lefapha hore na ebe maemo a lona ke ao le a tsebang kapa tjhe. Kgwebo e se e le teng ka ha re ho naha ya rona. Ke ya ho nyalana le batho ba tswang dinaheng tse ding. Ho molemo ha ka kang hore ha re nyalana re nyalane le batho bao re ba ratang, hore ebe kgwebo. Ha re tsekisi batho ba nyalanang ka tsela ya nnete e tshwanetseng, empa re bohloko haholo ka ba hwebang ka lenyalo.

Re le komiti re re mo-Afrika ya nyatseng kapa ya nyetsweng ke moratua wa hae, eo eseng moahi wa naha ena, a qale pele ka kopo ya tumello ya na nakwana ya boahi, ke hore a fuwe tokomane ya tumello ya boahi ya nakwana e tlang ho nka dilemo tse hlano. Ka morao ho dilemo tseo tse hlano, ha ho se ho ena le bonnete ba hore ke nnete batho bana ba a ratana, ke banyalani mme ha ho qeya-qeyo, e be hona motho eo a ka qalang fatshe a etsa kopo ya tokomane ya ka nako tsohle ya boahi. Re etsa kgoeletso ho batswadi bohle ba Afrika Borwa ho tshwarahana le mmuso dipatlisisong tsa manyalo a seng molaong. Batswadi, emang ka maoto, bana ba nyalwa ka ntle ho tsebo ya lona. (Translation of Sotho paragraphs follows.)

[Mrs M M MAUNYE: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Minister Mapisa-Nqakula, all the hon Ministers in this House, members of Parliament, workers and our visitors who are present here, we thank you for your presence today. Chairperson, allow me to remember our mothers who brought us up in the fight for our rights as women of South Africa.

We thank all women who fought during difficult times of oppression. It was painful, and laws were harder on a black person. On the women’s side it was such a painful oppression, because they did not have any rights at all, such as the right to buy land or a house, or even to have a bank book, or to register for university education or at a technikon. All these were just a dream to a young girl.

Today, because of our women like madam Rita, madam Bertha and madam Ivy, in this month of August we are able to remember women as we complete ten years of democracy, as we celebrate the freedom of democracy; we celebrate because women unchained themselves from the chains of oppression. Today it is wonderful in this people’s government. We welcome all the people from other countries, irrespective of where they come from.

What is important is that there should be a national law that welcomes tourists. Everyone who visits this country should respect the laws of this country and follow the correct procedure in visiting here, whether it is for purposes of touring or investing or even working. What is needed is that one should follow the right procedure that is required when one wants to work or tour in this country. We support the Hon minister in that South Africans should go to the Department of Home Affairs offices to make sure that we are married to our spouses, so that one doesn’t find oneself married to an unknown person or unknown people.

We emphasise, especially to the youth of South Africa, as well as those who did not commit themselves to marriages, that it is important to notify the department on whether or not one’s condition is unchanged. There is a business in our country. It is that of getting married to foreigners. It is important that when we marry, we get married to people we love, so that it does not become a business. We are not against people who marry in a proper way, but we are disappointed by those who marry for business purposes. We, as the committee, are saying that an African who marries or is married to his or her lover, and who is not a citizen of this country, must first apply for a temporary citizenship permit, and be granted that permit document for five years. After those five years, when there is evidence that these two people are in love, and they are undoubtedly married, such a person will be able to apply for a permanent citizenship. We urge all South African parents to work together with the government in investigating illegal marriages. Parents, stand up, your children are getting married without your knowledge.]

We call upon the Minister to review the Marriage Act and tighten the law so that it is not easily abused. It is therefore important for young and unmarried citizens to verify their status with the department by supporting the Minister regarding the Check Your Status campaign.

Tokoloho ya rona re e fumane ha boima, ha re a e reka ka tjhelete. [We found our freedom in difficulty, we did not buy it.]

We are a developing nation in a very exciting time of reconstruction and development. Every step that we take in nation–building is a new victory in our struggle to overcome apartheid baggage. We are therefore happy that the preamble now allows for the promotion of economic growth through the employment of needed foreign labour, especially those foreigners within the southern development community and the continent. We are also encouraged that the preamble will now strive to promote a human rights-based culture of enforcement, and that civil society will be educated on the rights of foreigners and refugees.

There is a need for exceptionally skilled and qualified people. Such skills should be transferred to our citizens so that there is no repeat of applying for renewal of permits. Some presenters raised concerns pertaining to the removal of the requirement for chartered accountant certificates. We cannot afford to privatise services that should be provided by the department to foreigners in need of these services. The department should speed up the training of officials so that such services could be provided without hassles.

We support the composition of the board. Further, we urge that the administration of the board be performed by officials of the department, as designated by the director-general for that purpose. We understand the need for the public to participate in the board. However, the Minister will choose whom she wishes to consult outside the prescribed members of the listed departments, and those from labour and business. In this process she can choose additional members from the public with whom to consult.

If the representatives from the board, who were present at the public hearings, were a sample of a gender balance within the board, then the Minister must have the freedom to correct the demographic situation.

Letona la ka mme Mapisa-Nqakula, ke phahamisa yona tletlebo ena ya ka moo lekgotla le thehilweng ka teng, hobane batho ba neng ba le teng mane haholo e ne ele bo-ntate. Jweale ho hlakile hore hona le kgaello ya bo-mme ka hare ho lekgotla leo. Re kopa ke hona he hore o etse ka hohle ka moo o ka kgonang ka teng hore mane lekgotleng la rona, bo-mme le bona ba be teng. Ke a leboha modula setulo [Ditlatse.] (Translation of Sotho paragraph follows.)

[My Minister madam Mapisa–Nqakula, I raised a complaint about the way in which the House is formed, because most of the people who attended were men. It is clear that there is a shortage of women in that House. We would like you to try your best to make sure that in our House, women are are present as well. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]]

Ms N C NKABINDE: Deputy Chair and hon members, the Bill before us addresses a substantial list of technical and grammatical problems in the principal Act. The passage of the principal Act was dodged by a political tug of war. As a result, after many years, a piece of legislation, which was riddled with these errors, was hurriedly passed.

It was a textbook example of how not to legislate. Given this history of the principal Act, we support any effort to resolve unnecessary errors that crept into the law. Immigration registration directly impacts on the economy and has specific implications for a number of government departments.

It is, therefore, necessary for government to resolve its policy on this matter once and for all. We cannot afford continuing uncertainty and policy flip-flops. As far as specific policy amendments are concerned, I would like to single out the following matters; the amendment to section 5, proposed by clause 6, limits the powers of the Immigration Advisory Board. We concur that it is more appropriate for the board to fulfil an advisory role instead of the executive authority originally implied. In the end, the Minister is the executive authority and should be the one that is held accountable for a decision.

It is hoped that the new sections 8 and 9 will prove to be less cumbersome that the original wording, but much still depends on the regulation that will flow from these provisions, as well as the proper implementation. Similarly, the amendment to section 11 to prevent endless extensions of visitors’ permits is welcome, but will still require policy.

In conclusion, the amendment of section 15 should go a long way towards addressing one of the primary concerns regarding immigration policy. If we intend to encourage foreign investment, the sort that translates into long- term enterprise and job creation, then we must make it possible for those business people to enter the country without unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles. The UDM supports the Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr Y WANG: Madam Chair, hon Minister, hon members and everyone that is watching us, thank you. Congratulations, Mr President. It looks like the department is going to meet the deadline on this legislation. However, as the Bill was processed in such a short timeframe, it is quite possible that more errors will occur.

We may also find practical problems with the implementation of the Bill, such as the huge task of co-ordinating all the various departments that are necessary for effective delivery. We certainly hope that the department has already consulted fully with interested groups and departments in their clusters like Sars, SAPS, National Intelligence Agency and the Health department.

South Africa must also check that the Bill will be in line with all conventions we have ratified and adopted. We are glad that the hon Minister has recently stated that she would not hesitate to improve on the Bill again in future, if necessary. That shows that she is serious and determined to clean up this legislation. Thank you, hon Minister.

However, one just wonders if that is the best approach to this important piece of legislation that affects everyone in the country. Judging from the public’s complaints, would not it have been better if stakeholders could have had adequate time to work together on this Bill?

In conclusion, I would like to recommend that the departments provide a public-friendly version of the Act, that is, language-friendly to the average citizen on the streets, and also an updated regulation manual to all Home Affairs officials to ensure that public servants are properly trained to understand the implications of the Bill so that they can deliver properly.

By the way, last Friday afternoon I put away my parliamentary card and visited the Home Affairs branch here in Cape Town. I stood in the queue for half and hour, trying to get a blank application form, and I really struggled. You cannot believe it! In the end I had to take out my parliamentary card to get the things that I wanted. I think that is wrong! It is just a thought. Thank you.

Ms C DUDLEY: Madam Speaker and hon Minister, I speak on behalf of my colleague, hon Steve Swart. The ACDP appreciates the fact that this Amending Bill seeks to address a number of defects in the principal Act that were caused when the Immigration Act was rushed through Parliament in 2003, and that a long-term review process is envisaged by the Minister.

The ACDP raised various reservations concerning the Amendment Bill, the most important of which related to the removal of the statutory appeal and review procedures. We agreed with those commentators who held the view that the then formulation of the draft Bill would not pass the test of constitutionality.

The ACDP was, therefore, pleased that the department took cognisance of the concerns and redrafted certain amendments dealing with the delegation powers of the Minister and director-general, and provided specifically for review and appeal procedures relating to any decision in terms of the Act.

We are still concerned, however, that the requirement for chartered accountant certificates, particularly in relation to business permits, has been removed from the principal Act. Whilst we appreciate that the provision for such certificates can still be in the regulations, we would have preferred retaining those requirements in the principal Act. We do not believe that the department has the necessary capacity to properly deal with this issue without the involvement of chartered accountants.

The ACDP also has concerns relating to the composition of the Immigration Advisory Board, and shares the view that the role of civil society has been reduced. This being a policy matter, we trust that this matter will be recognised once the long-term review of immigration policy takes place.

The ACDP looks forward to participating in the long-term review process and will support this amending Bill. Thank you.

Mr M P SIBANDE: Chairperson, Ministers, hon members and distinguished guests, it is a shame and a disgrace to realise that among the opposition parties there are still people who are daydreaming, who are shouting and singing: Bring back my history.

Kulabo bantu kufanele kucace kamhlophe ukuthi kule lengabadi yakithi akukho mhlambi kazelusile, futhi akukhona kwampunzi edla emini. [To those people, it should be crystal clear that in this indigenous country of ours there shall be no breaking of rules and that the cat is not away, so the mice shall not play.]

These people do not appreciate that the democratic government is continuously transforming our country.

Isibonelo, uMphathisihlalo uke wakhuluma ngesitolo esidayisa izinto zabantu abadala kuphela (adult shop) ngaphandle.[For example, the Chairperson spoke about the adult shop outside.]

There is something very strange about it.

Inhlangano ethile phakathi kwethu njengoba silapha, iyona ebikade isebenzisa leli hhovisi. [A certain political party here amongst us is the one that has been using this office.]

Within two or three days it would be occupied by the people who had moved in. It is a shame to them. [Interjections.]

It must be clear to everybody in this august House that the main objective of the Immigration Amendment Bill is to redress the fact that the regulations were inconsistent with the Immigration Act, particularly with regard to skills, migration and immigration control.

The current Immigration Act had unintended consequences for migrant workers regarding their work permits, in particular mineworkers and farmworkers who were recruited from neighbouring countries. They were being shamelessly exploited by unscrupulous mine owners, farmers and other employers at our borders. Some of the ways of exploitation was to withhold their remuneration on payday, and to then summarily deport the workers without them being paid their salaries. Workers dismissed in this way could not even engage in normal labour relation procedures to ensure that they got what was due to them. They were simply reported to the authorities, loaded up and deported.

We salute the bravery of our migrant mineworkers, toilers of the soil, who work deep down in the heart of the earth. During the changing of their shifts, many of them will be found, queuing, dancing and singing courageous songs like, “Thina lomhlaba siwugezile”. [We have cleansed this earth.] Despite their passion for their work, our current Immigration Act does not allow them the opportunities to be given what is due to them.

The ANC led-government committed itself by amending this Bill to cover all migrant workers who were not catered for after termination of service. Accordingly, we have changed the subsection dealing with work permits to ensure that these remain valid for a period of up to six months after the contract has been terminated, so that the affected foreign worker can then exhaust all the rights they are accorded to in terms of the Constitution and laws governing labour relations.

This amendment also provides that the period to redress their labour problems may be extended for an additional three months at a time. For this extension, the affected workers need to provide proof to the Director- General of the Department of Home Affairs, along with their work permits and the details of their last employer.

During our deliberations on and considerations of the Immigration Amendment Bill, the ANC realised that the principal Act had unintended consequences for visitors who wanted to enter our country for entertainment purposes, conferences, or for other short term professional purposes. It become apparent that visitors falling in this category did not necessarily want to apply for a work permit, since they were only performing or consulting for few days and would then leave the country soon after that.

The committee then decided that the concession to this category of visitors’ permits could fall under the jurisdiction of the director- general. He would be able to grant permission to the holder of a visitor’s permit to conduct work, of course subject to certain conditions.

The ANC was concerned that the business permit holder in this country not only invested in cash, but the investment often took the form of property or an investment that would mature over a longer period of time. Therefore, we required that a foreign investor submits proof that he has fulfilled the requirements of the business permit, and that he would continue to update the director-general on the progress of this investment.

The requirements of the corporate permits have not substantially changed with this amendment, except that the corporations are now required to report to the director-general instead of the department, and they must comply with the prescribed requirements at all times. Failure to do so will lead to the withdrawal of the permit.

Millions of people are flocking to our country for different reasons. This is posing a challenge to the Department of Home Affairs to have adequate resources to handle the situation.

Umtsetfo uba ngumtsetfo nawuhlonishwa bantfu lowakhelwe bona. Loku kwabonakala ngesikhatsi Imbokodvo iba ngemadzelakufa, imasha, imashela umtsetfo wemapasi nga 1956. Nanyalo malunga lahloniphekile kumele sicaphelisise kutsi lomtsetfo webantfu labangena kulelive unekulawuleka lokutakwenta kutsi uhlonipheke futsi umbandzakanye wonkhe muntfu. (Translation of siSwati paragraph follows)

[A law becomes a law when the people it is meant for respect it. This was evident when the Imbokodvo defied death by marching against the pass law of

1. Even now, hon members, we have to be careful that the Act concerning immigrants into South Africa, is regulated so that it is respected and caters for everybody.]

Let us put the interests of our country first in order to realise the dream of making South Africa accessible to all people who want to add value to our wellbeing. Accountability is a key word to any endeavour to make any piece of legislation relevant to our sociopolitical situation. It is for that reason that we strongly believe in making this envisaged legislation more centralised for the same reason.

This new amending Bill also seeks to redress a nightmare unfolding for our country’s women. It is particularly relevant in this women’s month that we, the ANC led-government, do whatever it takes to protect our grandmothers, mothers and sisters from exploitation and unprincipled foreign nationals who use marriage to our women, with or without their permission, to gain access to residency of our country.

Home Affairs offices across the country are inundated with queries from women who find themselves suddenly married, and they have no knowledge of whom their spouse is or how they ended up being married in the first place. In some instances, poor, vulnerable women are offered money as a bribe in order for them to agree to marry a stranger who happens to be a foreigner. After they do it, they never see the person again. Sometimes the women do not even fully understand what they agreed to.

The most tragic of these cases have been reports of foreigners targeting HIV-infected women, especially those who are close to dying. They marry these women, knowing that they only have to bear the burden of marriage for a few months. Our own officials in the department are sometimes pawns in a much larger global game that is controlled by crime syndicates intent on exploiting our women.

According to the new amended system, the director-general will have to be satisfied that a spousal relation has existed in good faith for five years before an application for a permanent resident permit will be granted, and to strengthen these stringent requirements even further, the amendment stipulates that this permit will lapse if, within two years from the date when the permit has been issued, the good faith spousal relationship no longer exists. The only exception that will be made is if the spouse dies.

The ANC supports the amending Bill. I thank you.

Mr B E PULE: Madam Chair and hon members, we in the UCDP accept that society, particularly a young democracy like ours, is dynamic and not static. We also know that one of the objects of this Bill, among others, is to seek to address a number of defects in the principal Act, which were caused by its hurried passage in 2003. Regarding that, I would like to point out that the Bill took more or less eight years before being passed.

It has to be borne in mind that the principal Act was at some stage an issue between the six-a-side committees of the ANC and the IFP. Therefore, in an effort to beat the deadline set by the Constitutional Court, it was hurried. We accept the omission of chartered accountants at every turn of entry to make the Republic safe in exceptional cases, such as in the case of large companies.

The UCDP accepts and recognises the delegation of powers given to the director-general as head of department. As accounting officer, the director- general has to make decisions, as against the reference to the department having to do all the work. We appreciate that the Bill made it quite clear that the Minister will delegate certain powers to the director-general. We also accept that the director-general is the first to be appointed as a member of the immigration board, unlike in the principal Act, where this official was an afterthought, having been the last of the board members.

The UCDP also welcomes the clearly set out functions of the immigration board, which are advisory in nature and not calculated to upstage even the Minister. The preamble makes provision for the legislation to ensure that the role of the Republic in the continent and the region is …

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon member, your time has expired.

Mr B E PULE: The UCDP supports the Immigration Amendment Bill. [Applause.]

Dr S E M PHEKO: Madam Chairperson, the PAC supports the Immigration Amendment Bill. The amendments seem to be an improvement on the previous Act.

I simply want to state that I have noted the regulations in section 7. They seem to be fair, particularly seeing that the Minister may consult with the board. The provision of the review and appeal procedures in section 9 must be welcomed.

The Bill defines a resident as the holder of a permanent resident permit. This is acquired on the basis of having lived in the country for five years, upon procurement of a job. One assumes that what really distinguishes a citizen from a resident is that the latter cannot vote in this country, and that residents will have IDs to this effect.

Research conducted by the University of the Witwatersrand indicates that most traders have legitimate businesses. It is disturbing that the inward movement is often from Europeans, Americans and Asians. They often have less difficulty gaining residence than the so-called informal or unskilled workers from neighbouring African countries. Given that much of South Africa’s economy was built with the sweat and blood of migrant labourers, it seems peculiar that many citizens of neighbouring countries, especially from Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland, should complain that they are not treated well at the borders.

Neighbouring immigrants who have no criminal record must be treated with deep consideration. Not long ago, their own economy suffered because of their assistance to their brothers and sisters here to overthrow apartheid colonialism.

In view of so many of our women who often suffer the trauma of finding that they are “wives” of mysterious foreign “husbands”, this Bill should have prescribed a very severe punishment for foreigners who commit this type of crime. The burden of proof must also be shifted away from our women, who are victims. [Time expired.]

Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Deputy Chair, the MF is aware of society’s thoughts on the issue of foreigners. Xenophobia is a reality to most. With unemployment and poverty being the major challenges and problems faced by South Africans, these fears are nurtured.

However, the MF finds that there is a need to publicise the government’s many initiatives to create employment. Efforts by the public and private enterprises should comprise initiatives to do the same. Further, the impact and efforts of affirmative action are, in securing hope for many, also creating stress for some. In view of this, South Africans’ xenophobic attitude is a natural reaction.

However, the MF feels that the realisation needs to be embedded in society that, yes, we as South Africans have a foremost responsibility to our citizenry to educate them that South Africa belongs to a larger entity, ie Africa. We have a responsibility towards Africa, as a global initiative to strengthen our continent.

The MF supports the amendment made in the light of the immigrants’ entry to, and departure from South Africa. Other common fears concern drugs, violence and money-laundering, which are so often associated with foreigners, not forgetting the scams involving illegal immigrants who claim to be married to innocent South Africans. We urge that these be controlled and that such persons be ejected from South Africa.

It is, however, true that our neighbours have many beneficial trades and skills that they can teach us. We need to take advantage of these, noting the benefits it may yield for our economy. Further, foreign investments bring much income to our economy. So, while hostility may be expressed regarding the issues of immigrants, there is a lot that we may gain from that too.

The Immigration Amendment Bill aligns mechanisms for ensuring that we draw the positive and expel the negative. South Africans, rest assured that our government has your best interests at heart.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms C-S Botha): Hon member, your time has expired.

Miss S RAJBALLY: The MF supports the Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr S SWART: Madam Chair, the current Act has many flaws. The situation is that in terms of the current Act it is difficult to promulgate regulations that suit the Bill. The DA, therefore, welcomes the new Bill and we will support it.

At the public hearings, however, there were concerns from various parties who gave inputs on the question of chartered accountants with regard to business permits that were taken away. The director-general may, in his discretion, appoint a chartered accountant to actually look into the merits of a particular business permit application. However, if that is the case and he does appoint a chartered accountant or chartered accountants’ company at that point in time, we may just as well legislate for it now, but that is not being done.

The officials or delegated authority will now have the capacity or right to decide whether a person has the necessary means to actually have a business permit. We are concerned about the capacity of officials, ie whether they will be able to do so. It could also leave the door open for corruption, because somebody could quite easily slip an official a few thousand rands under the table to certify that he has the requisite means to actually receive a business permit.

We are not advocating that we should get work for CAs and we don’t want to place obstacles in the way of people wanting to invest in South Africa, but we might be dealing with people with dishonourable intentions and therefore we feel that it’s necessary for independent people to actually look into the matter.

We would, therefore, have liked to see the question of chartered accountants remaining in the Bill only in as far as business permits are concerned. We would like Parliament to note, accordingly, that that is the stance of the DA, though we do support the Bill.

During discussions this afternoon, the hon members on my right-hand side referred to the adult shop on the other side of Parliament on a few occasions. I would like to say that they tried to create two perceptions: the one perception was that the DA actually opened that shop, and that is a blatant lie. I would be very worried if I were a member of the ruling party because, if this week’s Sunday Times is to be believed, it seems to be members of the ANC who watch dirty movies in their hotels in Pretoria. [Interjections.]

The other perception was that the DA would be against regulating as far as these shops are concerned. That is also far from the truth. We don’t worry about it. We will probably be in favour of regulations. The only thing we are saying is that, if you want to be on the moral high ground by saying that we should regulate these shops, we should draw the line right through as far as the travel scam is concerned, as well. Thank you. [Interjections.]

Mr W M SKHOSANA: Thank you Chairperson. Madam Chair, Ministers, Deputy Ministers and members, the Immigration Amendment Bill seeks to rectify some of the concerns that we as the ANC raised in the portfolio committee during the deliberation of the current Immigration Act, Act 13 of 2002.

We were duly concerned that the problematic sections, which were removed from the principal Act, would find their way back into the regulations. We therefore tasked the hon Minister of Home Affairs, through her department, to come up with regulations that would be in line with the amending Bill.

We were not surprised, though disturbed, when the discarded clauses did in fact show up in the regulation drafted by the department then. All of us, as committee members, attempted to amicably solve the issue of the regulation, but it all fell on the side. Ultimately the Cabinet intervened through the President, hence we are here today.

It is, therefore, rather an unpleasant task for a portfolio committee in Parliament to do some damage control, in order to ensure that we have an Act that can be implemented in such a manner that will promote a flow of visitors from and to South Africa without hesitation of any kind. The spirit of co-operation and transparency that has marked the passing of this amending Bill has pleased and even surprised the ANC, because the co- operation that we received from the opposition parties and from everyone else led to one direction only.

Everyone in the department – those who represented the department in the redrafting of the Bill – was of great assistance and they went all the way to ensure that they reformulate certain problematic sections in a very pleasant way. The spirit of co-operation was clearly apparent when we made changes in clauses of the Bill dealing with work permits, and also in all other changes that we recommended.

In fact, the experience of certain stakeholders was more problematic compared to that of the government representatives. The hon member of the IFP referred to the fact that the good work of the past nine years was put aside, but I think that if there is no co-operation and teamwork, we can work on an issue for 10 years without any results. We only took a short space of time because of teamwork, and we achieved a lot through this Bill. [Applause.]

Madam Chair, the ANC-led government is fully aware that South Africa has become a destination of choice for many foreigners who want to visit our country or bring business to our shores. For us to woo indirect investment, we need to have legislation that will promote and protect the existing jobs for our citizens, and at the same time encourage new opportunities.

What was also increasingly apparent during the public hearing processes was that South African immigration legislation would be closely monitored in the SADC region. As we enter the new century, it will also be internationally scrutinised. The ANC’s role in this Bill was to ensure that the department has a piece of legislation that can be implemented in the shortest time possible.

Our concern was also that the amendment should give rise to the transparent set of regulations that would carry the policy contained in the Bill through the process of implementation. We were - and we will continue to be

• vigilant, Minister, to ensure that the regulation that follow the passage of this Bill will not seek to create a loophole to bring in the existence of this detail that was discussed in the committee.

Chairperson, sections 27 and 28 of the principal Act are amended to do away with the requirement of the certification of a chartered accountant and the Department of Labour, as was provided for in the principal Act. Instead of furnishing certification of a chartered accountant, a foreigner will in fact give proof of certain matters to the satisfaction of the director- general.

I think that is enough, because not everything is in terms of rands or dollars. You have to prove to the director-general that you have the relevant information, and he would be convinced and accept you as such.

The proposed amendment to section 28 of the principal Act will make it possible for the director-general to withdraw a permanent permit if the first holder is convicted of any offence listed not only in Schedule 1, but also in Schedule 2 of the principal Act. The requirement is that such conviction should, within four years of issuance of the permanent residence permit, be dealt with.

The granting of an exemption to the requirement of residence in respect of certain residents or class of residents also no longer resides in the recommendation of the director-general. Insolvent persons, before being admitted in the Republic of South Africa, should have a visa, irrespective of whether they are citizens of a visa-exempted country or not.

The need to consult the board is also dispensed with. We are trying to ensure that everything is taken care of in as far as issues of immigration are concerned. I think the international world is also satisfied. Section 31 of the principal Act that deals with the provision of an unauthorised person to enter the Republic in a place other than a port of entry, is also amended.

As this has already been dealt with elsewhere in the Bill, it is also amended to remove the requirement that the Minister must consult with the board in order to issue exemptions in terms of the Act, and to remove the six-month limitation with regard to distinguished visitors. Provision is also made to confirm that the entry of a resident or diplomatic person from a foreign state is dealt with under the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act of 2001. That is Foreign Affairs and has nothing to do with Home Affairs.

Section 33 of the principal Act is amended in order to establish an inspectorate in terms of the Act, and not by regulations, as was the case in the past. Section 34 of the Act is amended so that the requirement is now a place of detention for illegal foreigners who are to be deported.

The administration for all those people that are to be deported should be the domain of the Department of Home Affairs. The director-general should determine the place of detention, as this will allow the detention of illegal foreigners at police stations and other places in terms of the principal Act.

Chairperson, the amendment to section 35 of the principal Act is to ensure that reference made to any mode of transport, including ships, vehicles and aircraft, provides appropriate description to a person in charge of that conveyance. It also seeks to ensure that the person in charge of that particular conveyance complies with requirements, to ensure that the passengers are properly documented.

So, we are all ensuring that everybody takes responsibility. Section 39 of the principal Act is also amended in order to introduce a requirement for all businesses offering accommodation to keep a register of all its foreign guests. That is also important – I do not think we are demanding too much in any way.

Chairperson, we therefore want to assure all citizens of this country, the continent and SADC that the laws that we pass in this Parliament are going to ensure that life goes on and are tantamount to the level and the standard of the required legislation internationally.

Madam Chairperson, I therefore submit the acceptance of the ANC in as far as this Bill is concerned. I thank you. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Chairperson, I want to thank the portfolio committee and all the members who participated in this debate for the manner in which they dealt with the issues in this Bill, setting aside their political interests and party agendas, and really focusing on the challenges facing us as a country in the real spirit of patriotism.

I want to assure you that there was adequate public consultation and participation, in spite of the fact that we had three months within which we had to deal with this Bill. There was adequate consultation by the department with government departments, Cabinet clusters and the Immigration Advisory Board. Through the public participation process the portfolio committee was able to interact with various stakeholders such as the legal profession, organised business, labour, immigration practitioners, academics and so on.

There was adequate consultation in spite of the fact that we did not have much time. In fact, I don’t believe that even in the 10-year process that people claim we are reversing, we consulted as much as we did in the past three months. [Applause.]

I also want to assure everybody, including the members of the public, that the regulations will be published as soon we have passed this Bill and it has gone through the NCOP process. We hope that by 30 August exactly the regulations would be out for public comment.

I am not going to comment on the issue of the chartered accountants, because I think the portfolio committee dealt with that. I want to comment on the issue of the Immigration Advisory Board and the allegation, for instance, that the role of civil society has been reduced. That is not true, actually, because the representation of the civil society has been reduced from nine to seven. There is no huge reduction of the number of civil society representatives.

I also just want to caution members that the Immigration Advisory Board should not be seen as a terrain for the contesting of opinions and views between nongovernmental organisations and government, but should rather be seen as a body which is there to advise the member of the executive who has been assigned the responsibility of looking after immigration issues in this country. [Applause.]

It should not be seen as a terrain of struggle. I don’t think it is proper that we should always be talking about the numbers game. I also don’t think it is true that I reneged on the agreements with Nedlac, because business, labour and civil society are still going to be adequately represented on the Immigration Advisory Board.

I want to say that, in spite of the concerns which have been raised through the debate here this afternoon, I know for certain that all the members of this House believe that today we have moved a milestone towards a new immigration policy in this country.

I want to thank everybody who has supported the Bill, even those who have abstained, because I do understand the circumstances in which people find themselves with regard to these particular matters. [Applause.] I thank you profusely for participating in the debate and I respect your opinions on these matters. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Question put: That the Bill be read a second time.

Question agreed to (Inkatha Freedom Party abstaining).

Bill read a second time.

The House adjourned at 17:12. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. Introduction of Bills

 (1)    The Minister of Finance


     (i)     Finance Bill [B 13 - 2004] (National Assembly - sec 77)

     (ii)    National Payment System Amendment Bill [B 14 - 2004]
          (National Assembly - sec 75)

     Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Finance of
     the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint Tagging
     Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160, on
     19 August 2004 and 20 August 2004, respectively.

     In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of
     the Bills may be submitted to the JTM within three parliamentary
     working days.

1. Draft Bills submitted in terms of Joint Rule 159

 (1)    National Payment System Amendment Bill, 2004, submitted by the
     Minister of Finance on 17 August 2004. Referred to the Portfolio
     Committee on Finance and the Select Committee on Finance.


 (2)    Government Employees Pension Law Amendment Bill, 2004, submitted
     by the Minister of Finance on 17 August 2004. Referred to the
     Portfolio Committee on Finance and the Select Committee on
     Finance.

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister of Finance

 (a)    Report and Financial Statements of the Development Bank of
     Southern Africa Limited for 2003-2004, including the Report of the
     Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2003-2004.

 (b)    Projects of the Development Bank of Southern Africa Limited for
     2003-2004.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Health on the Traditional Health Practitioners Bill [B 66 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76), dated 17 August 2004:

   The Portfolio Committee on Health, having considered the subject of the Traditional Health Practitioners Bill [B 66 - 2003] (National Assembly - sec 76), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 76 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 66A - 2003].

2. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy on the Energy Regulator Bill [B 9 - 2004] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 18 August 2004:

   The Portfolio Committee on Minerals and Energy, having considered the subject of the Energy Regulator Bill [B 9 - 2004] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 9A - 2004].

3. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs, dated 18 August 2004:

   The Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs, referred to it, recommends that the House, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, approve the said Act.

 Request to be considered.

1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Trade Marks, dated 18 August 2004:

   The Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, having considered the request for approval by Parliament of the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Trade Marks, referred to it, recommends that the House, in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, approve the said Protocol.

 Request to be considered.